This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH 1/3] C++20 constexpr lib part 1/3


On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 16:47 -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 08:30:14PM +0000, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> > On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 21:04 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > 
> > > The RAJAPerf code appears to be built with -std=gnu++11 which
> > > means
> > > Ed's patch should make almost no difference at all. 99% of the
> > > patch
> > > has no effect unless compiling with -std=gnu++2a.
> > > 
> > > I don't see any ICE running the libstdc++ testsuite with
> > > -std=gnu++11,
> > > so I have no better suggestion than creating a bugzilla report
> > > for the
> > > C++ front-end, with the preprocessed source of WIP-COUPLE.cpp
> > 
> > I created a preprocessed file.  Unfortunately when I compile that
> > preprocessed file with the same options as the unpreprocessed file,
> > it does not ICE.  I compiled the original file with -save-temps and
> > that compile no longer gives an ICE.  I hate bugs like this.
> 
> Does -fdirectives-only make any difference?
> 
> Marek

Nope.  I also looked at the preprocessed file compiled with and without
this patch and the two preprocessed files are identical.  I am thinking
that this patch is triggering some unrelated latent bug.

Steve Ellcey
sellcey@marvell.com

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]